Then, Starsem (the Soyuz launch company) was a company founded by France and Russia. Later on (with the EADS merger) other countries from ESA and ESA itself got involved.

What I know from my own experience is that the French always considered the Ariane 4 rocket as "their own" rocket. They were also unhappy with the Italian LOX turbopump in Ariane 5 during the development, because it was unreliable and failed many times (I saw that myself at the test stand, there even were running gags if the turbopump will hold *g*), the French even said crap. They wanted to build it themselves but as ESA always splits the contracts to every participating country independent from quality.

CNES President Yannick d’Escatha and Head of Roskosmos Anatoly Perminov today signed an agreement on future launch vehicles and human spaceflights.The OURAL programme, initiated by France but ultimately intended as a European endeavour, plans to design and build technology demonstrators for the development of a future launch vehicle in partnership with Russia.

So if ESA continues to be so static I'm sure they will accelerate their own efforts in cooperation with Russia.

Not going to happen, apart from the fact that ESA has no requirement for such a large launch vehicle it would probably buy a single launch from NASA if it ever did have that requirement.

Back on Topic:

I wonder if the Italians might be persuaded to build a small manned orbital craft for Vega?

I think using the "Spam in a Can" approach to a Vega manned craft would be worth investigating since crew would only be in it for a few hours on their way to the ISS. This is not a tourist flight after all, a no thrills lob it up there as cheaply as possible is what is needed not an over complicated do everything vehicle that costs a packet and is abandoned before its flown.

I think the aim should be to produce something that flies rather than pushing the technology boundary while redistributing money to European aerospace companies for the sake of it. Dont get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with doing research on spacecraft it just needs to lead somewhere rather than another cancelled project.

No space agency today flies a manned craft built with modern technology, with the possible exception of China (although I guess that Shenzhou is probably based on Soyuz), its time we moved on and Europe built something of its own. Sorry for the rant.

_________________A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

ARD's weight is given as 2,716kg but it seems to be pretty well packed with instrumentation from the pictures so if it was converted to a manned craft I would have expected this to be reduced.

The article says that it was a 70% model of the Apollo capsule with a diameter of 2.8m and a height of 2.04m which should be big enough to accomodate a crew of 2. From a size point of view this is quite a good match for Vega which is quoted as being 3m in diameter with a height of 30m.

One thing that was a bit worrying was that once it had splashed down it was allowed to sit in the water for 6 hours so the interiorior could cool down.

Seems a pity that ESA never continued with this program.

Here is some more info on Vega, the brochure quotes payloads upto 2,500kg although I guess this would be into a lower than the ISS:

Something else to consider is the ISS's orbit, although this is normally quoted as being 400km, over the last few years it has probably been more like 350km which would increase the amount Vega could carry to it.

_________________A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

Thinking a little more about the high acceleration of Vega, what about creating a heavier second stage that could but a bigger payload into an ISS orbit?

The extra weight would reduce the accelleration and more fuel or boosters in the second stage (not sure anyone has ever launched a rocket with SRB strap ons fitted to a second stage) would allow a longer burn. I'm thinking of igniting the boosters once the main engine has finished. Vega being based on solids should be sturdy enough to take the stresses.

At only $18m a flight it looks pretty attractive financially, ESA are probably paying the Russians more than that everytime they send one of their astronauts to the ISS.

_________________A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

While I might agree big is beatiful, in the absence of anything resembling an indiginous European manned space vehicle I'll take whatever I can get. I would like to see ESA become less depedant on the US and Russia for putting its astronauts into space and after the debarcle of Hermes I think they need to be edged back into producing a craft of their own.

Trying to achieve something using Vega could lead on to better and bigger things with Arianne later but the important thing is to be doing something that is not going to swallow the whole budget and be cancelled before it flies. I dont think ESA will pay for a series of Arianne launches to develop a manned vehicle but they can get half a dozen Vega launches for the price of a single Arianne which would constitute a real flight program to test something.

_________________A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

I am not sure if ESA really needs a vehicle they developed of their own or with the Russians. They are interested to get european companies working at the ISS and to lease Columbus to them. And they are thinking about assisting space tourism.

This means that a simple taxi to the ISS would be interesting for them. I think I should have a look for further informations regarding their thoughts about assisting space tourism later.

I am not sure if ESA really needs a vehicle they developed of their own or with the Russians. They are interested to get european companies working at the ISS and to lease Columbus to them. And they are thinking about assisting space tourism.

I think that ESA should ultimately be independant of either the US or Russians IMO. Such independance is not only good for ESA but also for the other partners working on the ISS or any future space projects requiring manned space flight, as a loss of any one craft is less likely to result in the program being stalled like it was with the ISS. Where more and more countries are getting involved in space it should indicate that if ESA wish to be main player in the future the need to have independant access for manned flight (they took this view when they created Arianne for unmanned space flight, I see no reason why the same reasoning does not aplly for manned). Why they would not want to work with European companies to produce a suitable vehicle is beyond me.

Ekkehard Augustin wrote:

This means that a simple taxi to the ISS would be interesting for them. I think I should have a look for further informations regarding their thoughts about assisting space tourism later.

Initially that is what ESA should aim at but if they are serious about their Aurora program and sending astonauts to Mars then they need to get something sorted out for beyond LEO. No reason why they cant start out by sponsoring companies to produce sub-orbital craft which can later evolve into orbital taxis to the ISS.

_________________A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.